Catching up on the A.R.C.

by The Searcher 9 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • The Searcher
    The Searcher

    I haven't been here for several days, so apologies if similar comments have been posted regarding Messrs Spinks' & O'Brien's "spiritual & scriptural" replies to the Australian Royal Commission last week.

    Perhaps this line of questioning by Mr. Stewart could have helped exposed the org's corruption of the "two witness" rule:

    Mr Stewart: Mr. Spinks, does the Jehovah's Witnesses' leadership base their "two witness" rule solely on the Bible?

    Mr. Spinks: Yes.

    Mr. Stewart: Child abuse is at issue here, but can this Bible "rule" be adjusted or changed for different serious sins?

    Mr. Spinks: No it cannot, it applies to all serious sins.

    Mr. Stewart: Let me reword my question; in order for elders to proceed with disciplinary action against a member of the congregation, are two witnesses of the person's sin always required?

    Mr. Spinks: Yes.

    Mr. Stewart: Mr. Spinks, in view of your answers, as a senior member of the Australian Branch of Jehovah's Witnesses, are you unaware of your organization's "rules" that if two people see a member of the opposite sex entering another person's home and then leaving the following morning, an assumption that sexual intercourse has taken place will be made, and both parties will be subjected to disciplinary action based upon that assumption - not upon eyewitness testimony? Also, that Jehovah's Witness elders can accept the testimony of one witness to a serious sin, if another witness can be found to a similar but separate sin by the same accused person? You stated earlier that the "two witness" rule - as J.W.'s apply it - is based on the Bible. Would you reveal to everyone here, exactly where in the Bible the two variations I've just cited, appear?

  • flamegrilled
    flamegrilled

    Very simple video showing the double-speak.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LQoGXNcRdQ

  • Dreamerdude
    Dreamerdude

    Nice video, flame. Those guys from the Australasian branch should be fired for claiming only adults and children approaching adulthood get baptized. Or they should ask Lett to resign for pushing child baptism.

    The March JWTV program repeated "baptism at age 10" in three contexts:

    1) Lett was happy to see a 10 year old get baptized.

    2) Lett bragged about getting baptized himself at 10.

    3) He pointed out the youngest person baptized at the Paris Special Convention last year was 10.

    Repetition for emphasis.

    Of course he declined the summons issued by the ARC in January to participate in last week's hearing in Sydney, coward that he is, like his cohorts.

  • Joe Grundy
    Joe Grundy

    (I never was a JW).

    An excellent video, I thought, which highlights the dishonest evidence presented to ARC by Spinks and O'Toole (I hope/believe that the discrepancy will have been pointed out and understood by Mr Stewart and his team(.

    JW dot org can produce all the propaganda it likes, but to see these twats, and Jackson and the 'head JW lawyer' in action shows just how deficient they are in so many ways.

  • freddo
    freddo

    HOW CAN WE GET THAT VIDEO TO AS MANY AS POSSIBLE? EVEN ANONYMOUSLY?

    Sorry - did I shout?

  • EdenOne
    EdenOne

    marked

  • punkofnice
    punkofnice

    Cringeworthy lies from Spinks and that other bloke. Noted that no one from the GB refused to attend.

    It goes like this in my view:

    1. The Jobos will cry persecution if they even slightly hear of the ARC (which most won't).

    2. We ex JWs are fully aware of the lies told by the Spinks and whatshisface, and it frustrates us extremely.

    3. The world outside will probably not really be surprised that there are perverts working within a nutty cult.

  • punkofnice
    punkofnice

    ...that is....no one from the GB accepted the invitation to attend.

  • tor1500
    tor1500

    Hi,

    I am not up on all the ARC stuff. at one time I used to think....get it over with....it's taking too long...but, now that I think of it...The GB's are crapping in their pants...don't let their calmness fool you...JW's are used to being in court fighting for rights...and to be honest, they have implemented laws that in the long run should have been addressed...they go to court for the rights of the org....ok, that's ok....but this is different...they are being accused...they are not fighting for any rights...

    This is serious business....and the org. knows it....they are in the big office trying to wiggle out of it...but they can't....they can pay out all they want...this is a different fight for the JW's...it's not about their rights it's about the congregation rights and the brothers are supposed to protect us....so they should tell the congregation to go to the authorities....then go to the brothers .....not the other way around...

    I think the GB's are not getting any sleep, because they are waiting on God, and he just sitting there...saying...I never told you that you JW's are my mouth piece and you want to protect my name...I don't need no humans to protect my name...you went around bashing other religions...if you are waiting for me (Jehovah) to put words in your mouth....I don't think so....

    The longer this goes on the more they will sweat the more they will have to put out fires and soon the congregations will know...but no matter what, many will stay....

    Tor

  • flamegrilled
    flamegrilled

    HOW CAN WE GET THAT VIDEO TO AS MANY AS POSSIBLE? EVEN ANONYMOUSLY?

    Sorry - did I shout?

    Hi Freddo

    I would also like to know the answer to that question. There are a lot of people that I would like to see this, but I'm still at the stage which means I am restricted unless I kiss goodbye to my elderly parents and family.

    I feel particularly strongly about this because I was baptized at a young age (older than 10 though) and at the time it was very unusual and it was like I had to get special dispensation based on my "perceived maturity".

    GB 2.0 is simultaneously 1) lowering the age, 2) increasing the pressure to be baptized at a lower age, AND 3) doing nothing about the consequences when things go pear-shaped.

    If anyone has any tips on how to get this and other videos into the right people's hands anonymously I'd be very grateful.

    FG

    P.S. I have had previous correspondence with Angus Stewart, as I know many of you have also, and I will send another email today with a link to this. Perhaps that's one thing we could collectively do - share this video with him so that the ARC is fully aware of this.

    Further suggestions would be very welcome though